Florida Religious Freedom, Amendment 8 (2012)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Amendment 8
750px-Flag of Florida.svg.png
Quick stats
Type:Constitutional amendment
Constitution:Article I, Section 3
Referred by:Florida State Legislature
Topic:Religion
Status:Defeatedd
Amendment 8, also known as the Florida Religious Freedom Amendment, was on the November 6, 2012, state ballot in Florida as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment, where it was defeated.

The proposed measure would have prevented individuals from being barred from participating in public programs if they choose to use public funds at a religious provider. Essentially, the measure moved to repeal the state's ban of public dollars for religious funding, also known as the "Blaine Amendment."[1][2][3]

The measure required 60 percent voter approval for adoption.

The measure first appeared as Amendment 7, but on December 14, 2011, Leon County Circuit Judge Terry Lewis ruled that the legislatively-proposed measure would no longer be on the 2012 ballot. However, a new state law which was not overturned by the lawsuit allows the Florida Attorney General to rewrite the proposal. This must have been done within 10 days, according to that law, which it was.[4] Read more about the lawsuit here.

On December 20, 2011, Attorney General Pam Bondi rewrote the wording of the ballot measure, placing the proposal back on the ballot as Amendment 8[5]. Read the revised text here and on this article's lawsuit section.[6]

Election results

See also: 2012 ballot measure election results
Florida Amendment 8
ResultVotesPercentage
Defeatedd No4,286,37655.47%
Yes 3,441,128 44.53%

These results are certified and final.

Results via the Florida Department of Election's website.

Text of measure

The proposed ballot question read:[7][6]

Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution providing that no individual or entity may be denied, on the basis of religious identity or belief, governmental benefits, funding, or other support, except as required by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and deleting the prohibition against using revenues from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.

Constitutional changes

The proposed measure would amend Section 3 of Article I of the Florida Constitution to read:[7]

Text of Section 3: Religious Freedom

There shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting or penalizing the free exercise thereof. Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace, or safety. No individual or entity may be discriminated against or barred from receiving funding on the basis of religious identity or belief. No revenue of the state or any political subdivision or agency thereof shall ever be taken from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.

Support

The 'Yes on 8 Campaign' spearheaded the drive to pass the amendment.

Supporters

Endorsers include:

  • Former Governor Jeb Bush[8]
  • Catholic Association of Latino Leaders[9]
  • Florida Family Action[10]
  • Florida Baptist Convention[11]
  • Florida Chamber of Commerce[12]
  • James Madison Institute
  • U.S. Senator Marco Rubio
  • Speaker Designate Will Weatherford
  • Fl. Senators Thad Altman and Anitere Flores
  • Fl. Representatives Steve Precourt and Scott Plakon
  • Fl. CFO Jeff Atwater
  • Mike Hill, former member Florida Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
  • Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops
  • Catholic Association of Latino Leaders
  • Catholics Called 2 Witness
  • United Christians of Florida
  • Faith and Freedom Coalition
  • Christian Family Coalition
  • Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America
  • Agudath Israel of Florida
  • James Madison Institute
  • Christian Family Coalition
  • Clara White Mission
  • Lutheran Services of Florida, Inc.
  • Xtreme Soulutions
  • Liberty Counsel
  • National Americans of Faith Alliance PAC
  • Florida Eagle Forum

Arguments

Supporters said that Amendment 8 would preserve the status quo and end discrimination against individuals and religious organizations who provide social services to the broader community. The amendment will ensure preservation of many services to the needy that we take for granted. Current Florida law (the last sentence of Article I, Section 3 of the Florida Constitution) excludes religious organizations from direct or indirect government support just because they are called by faith to provide these services. Supporters believed Amendment 8 was needed because the Council of Secular Humanism is currently mounting a constitutional challenge to a prison ministries program based on Florida’s current no-aid provision (the last sentence of Article I, Section 3 of the Florida Constitution).  This challenge demonstrates that the current law could put much-needed social services at risk.

Opposition

The campaign against the measure was led by the "Vote No on 8" committee. The campaign argued that the amendment was not really about religious freedom, but was rather an attempt by the state to gain voter approval for funding religious organizations with taxpayer money.[13]

Campaign contributions

The following data was taken from the Florida Division of Elections campaign finance database. The following political action committees are campaigning against the measure.

PAC info:

PAC Amount raised Amount spent
Vote No On 8 1,000,000.00 759,003.00
Total 1,000,000.00 759,003.00


Lawsuits

See also: List of ballot measure lawsuits in 2012
2012 measure lawsuits
Lawsuits.png
By state
ArizonaArkansasColoradoFloridaMaryland
MichiganMassachusettsMinnesota
MissouriMontanaNevada
North DakotaOhioOklahoma
OregonRhode Island
By lawsuit type
Ballot text
Campaign contributions
Constitutionality
Motivation of sponsors
Petitioner residency
Post-certification removal
Single-subject rule
Signature challenges
Initiative process

Shapiro v. Browning

On July 20, 2011 the Florida Education Association (FEA) along with an inter-faith clergy group and some school administrators filed a lawsuit to block the proposed measure.[14] Also involved in the suit is Lee Swift, president of the Florida School Board Association, and Susan Summers-Persis, president of the Florida Association of School Administrators. Opponents argued that the measure's title and ballot summary are misleading. FEA described the proposed measure as an "underhanded attempt to legalize state tuition vouchers for private schools, including church-affiliated schools."[15] "This is designed to open up the state treasury to voucher schools, but that's not what the title of the amendment and the ballot summary say," said union president Andy Ford.[16]

Measure supporter Rep. Scott Plakon said, "They are trying to paint a picture that if this is repealed that the state is going to put a million dollar check in the offering of the Baptist Church and that is simply them being untruthful. All this does is make sure that our constitution does not treat people of faith differently than any others."[16]

In response, Rep. Scott Randolph said, "Throughout the 2011 legislative session, Republican legislators disguised the proposed constitutional amendment as one that would merely protect religious freedom and end religious discrimination. But in actuality, this proposal has one purpose: to allow the unlimited use of taxpayers’ money to send children to private schools instead of building a quality public school system."[17]

The filed lawsuit also challenged 2011 legislation that allowed for the Florida Attorney General's office to rewrite ballot summaries or titles after the Florida Supreme Court removed a certified measure from the statewide ballot. The lawsuit argued that authority for such a changes lies only in the Florida State Legislature.[18]

The lawsuit was heard on October 27, 2011.[19][20][21]

The case was heard by Judge Terry Lewis. The case (Shapiro v. Browning) number was 2011-CA-1892.

Court ruling

On December 14, 2011 Leon County Circuit Judge Terry P. Lewis ruled that the legislatively-proposed measure would no longer appear on the 2012 ballot. Specifically, Lewis ruled that the phrase "consistent with the U.S. Constitution" was ambiguous and misleading. The phrase, Lewis said, implied that it would make the Florida Constitution conform with the U.S. Constitution's 1st Amendment.[4]

The lawsuit also challenged 2011 legislation that allowed for the Florida Attorney General's office to rewrite ballot summaries or titles after Florida Supreme Court removed a certified measure from the statewide ballot. Lewis rejected that challenge. "The law under review does not, after all, give the Attorney General authority to re-write the amendment itself -- only the description of it," Lewis said.[4]

Because the 2011 state law was not overturned, the Florida Attorney General still maintained the authority to rewrite the proposal. This was done within 10 days, which was the allotted time to do so.

Measure re-written

On December 20, 2011, Attorney General Pam Bondi (R) rewrote the proposal, and therefore the measure was placed on the ballot for a second time.[4]

The new language of the proposal read: "Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution providing that no individual or entity may be denied, on the basis of religious identity or belief, governmental benefits, funding, or other support, except as required by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and deleting the prohibition against using revenues from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution."[6]

Despite new language, some argued that the measure remained misleading. Rabbi Merrill Shapiro of First Congregation Sons of Israel and the primary plaintiff in the case said that Amendment 7 would repeal provisions in the Florida Constitution to prohibit the use of public funds for religious institutions. However, Shapiro noted that the current ballot language did not make that clear.[22] Howard Simon, the executive director of the ACLU of Florida, said "the proposal continues to mislead voters by failing to inform them of the chief purpose and actual impact of the amendment – to virtually require taxpayer funding of religious activities of churches, mosques and synagogues."[23]. Citizens for Religious Freedom and Non-Discrimination said the amendment would ensure that time-honored social services provided by those motivated by faith will continue. [6]

In early January 2012 a lawyer for the education groups and clergy members said that they did not plan to pursue a legal challenge against the revised language.[24]

Path to the ballot

See also: Florida law for legislatively-referred constitutional amendments

In order to qualify for the November 2012 ballot the proposed amendment requires approval by a minimum of 60% in the both the House and the Senate. On April 27, 2011 the House voted 81-35 on HJR 1471. The Senate gave final approval to refer the measure to the statewide ballot on May 6 following a 26-10 vote.[25][26]

Timeline

Calendar.png

The following is a timeline of events surrounding the measure:

Event Date Developments
Approval Apr. 27, 2011 The House voted 81-35 in favor of the measure.
Final approval May 6, 2011 Senate gave final approval to refer the measure to the statewide ballot.

See also

Articles

External links

Additional reading

link title

Editorials

References

  1. Florida State Senate,"SJR 1218: Religious Freedom (status and summary)," retrieved April 13, 2011
  2. Associated Press,"Repeal of Fla. ban on religious funding gets boost," April 13, 2011
  3. The Palm Beach Post,"Voters to get chance to lift religious ban," May 6, 2011
  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 The Palm Beach Post,"Fla. judge knocks religious funding question off ballot; attorney general could put it back on," December 14, 2011
  5. Florida Division of Elections page on the measure
  6. 6.0 6.1 6.2 News-Press, "Bondi rewrites Amendment 7 summary," December 20, 2011
  7. 7.0 7.1 Florida State Senate,"HJR 1471 full text," retrieved May 13, 2011
  8. [1]
  9. [2]
  10. [3]
  11. [4]
  12. [5]
  13. Vote No on 8 campaign website
  14. The Miami Herald,"Teachers union aims to block attempt to lift ban on tax money for religious organizations," July 19, 2011
  15. Florida Capital Bureau,"FEA sues to block voucher amendment," July 20, 2011
  16. 16.0 16.1 Associated Press,"Repeal of Fla. ban on religious funding challenged," July 20, 2011
  17. The Bradenton Times,"Rep. Scott Randolph Applauds Legal Challenge of HJR 1471," July 23, 2011
  18. Ocala.com,"Teachers sue over validity of proposed amendment to state constitution," July 20, 2011
  19. The Palm Beach Post,"Florida merit-pay law challenge is part of bigger fight by unions against GOP legislatures," September 14, 2011
  20. Associated Press,"Judge hearing challenge to Fla. religion amendment," October 27, 2011
  21. News-Press,"Court battle begins over ballot measure," October 27, 2011
  22. Historic City,"Shapiro: Amendment 7 re-write still deceptive," December 23, 2011
  23. The Florida Independent,"Faith leaders say ‘Religious Freedom’ amendment is still misleading," December 21, 2011
  24. Associated Press,"Revised Fla. religion amendment not challenged," January 3, 2012
  25. Florida State Senate,"HJR 1471 vote history," retrieved May 9, 2011
  26. Associated Press,"Senate approves repeal of religious aid ban," May 6, 2011